Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22475.1277950912@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database
Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > You need to make sure not only that you replay commit records in > order, but also that, for example, you don't replay an > XLOG_HEAP2_CLEAN record too early. Hm, good point. That probably means that you *do* need fencepost records, and furthermore that you might need an interlock to ensure that you get the fencepost in early enough on the other stream. Ugh --- there goes your concurrency. What about having a single WAL stream for all commit records (thereby avoiding any possible xact-serialization funnies) and other WAL records divided up among multiple streams in some fashion or other? A commit record would bear minimum-LSN pointers for all the streams that its transaction had written to. Things like HEAP_CLEAN records would bear minimum-LSN pointers for the commit stream. Workable? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: